No, I wouldn't agree.
Incarceration is a direct consequence to a decision to violate the law. There are many more poor people not in jail than are...just as there are many more wealthy people not in jail than are.
I think the two criteria you set out are unrelated.
Next step?
I think you are side stepping my question, there can never be more people of any group incarcerated than there are who are free. I believe there are more terrorists free than in captivity, does that mean that being a terrorist doesn't mean you should be locked up?
Next step, so you believe that your living conditions and income have no bearing on the increased possibility to commit crimes?
Wolrd Bank study on Crime and Poverty Correlation
Are you suggesting that because you're poor you should be locked up? I didn't miss the allusion, I simply don't believe your assets determine whether or not you should be in jail, your personal character does.
For every person that is in jail, there are thousands similarly situated that chose not to commit a crime.
Correct.
That's not to say it isn't one of the most popular excuse for criminals.
Committing a crime is a personal choice made based on your character and values. To say that being poor causes crime then all poor people should be criminals and their not...not even a large percentage of them are.
To say that smoking causes cancer then all smokers should have cancer and they do not...not even a large percentage of them do.
So then you believe that your enviornment does not help shape the person you become?
And I am not saying that all poor people commit crimes and should be locked up. I just think that it is hard to beleive that there is a higher percentage of lower income than wealthy in prision, but it is all just a coincidence because they just all happened to be bad individuals. Their situations and environments contributed nothing to how they turned out.
This thread has potential
So, where does personal responsibility play into your analogy?
First of all, smoking is a legal practice that, if you engage in it, could result in a negative consequence...cancer. If I don't smoke, I won't get a cancer related to my smoking.
Crime is an illegal practice that, if you engage in it, could result in a negative consequence...incarceration. If I don't commit a crime, I won't be incarcerated for my criminal behavior.
Seems to me the negative consequences of both still rely on a choice based on character and values.
No, environment has a lot to do with the development of your character and values. But, the fundamental value of knowing the difference between right and wrong are -- in spite of our environment and absent a defect -- resident from birth.
Otherwise, those that beat the man to death would have stood around not thinking what they did would get them into trouble. No, instead, they fled after the crime.
First you're going to have to define poor vs. not poor before you can definitively state there is a higher percentage of poor people in prison than a percentage of wealthy. Because, we start out with a lot more poor people than rich, there is the high probability those ratios will be experienced in prison.
And, as far as their situations and environment contributing...no, I reject that. Now, if you want to argue that their response to their situation and environment contribute, you may have a point.
But, I'm back to the obvious. There are thousands more that are similarly situated with similar situations and environments that choose NOT to commit crimes. So, once again, it boils down to personal choice. No?
Ok, I'll try and find a report later on regarding the poor vs. not poor percentages...until then I will not cite that as an arguement.
I agree with you that it does come down to a personal choice, but I where we differ is that I think that a moral compass is formed as a direct result of the environment you grow up in. You are completely right that there is no 100% factor in that moral compass. No example I can give will be 100% correct. If that is what it will take to convice you of my point, we may as well end it here. I can't do that, it is not possible.
I think we are also debating from two different mindsets. You seem to be using the attack on the car as your point of reference, where I was using your comments
"Is there a race, other than blacks, that routinely does this?"
"But, seriously, look at the riots started over the past 40 years, any not started by blacks?"
"No reason to destroy your own community"
In regards to the attack, it is inexcusible and the attackers should be punished.
In regards to race, you previously stated "There's no discrimination against blacks. There is, however, discrimination against thugs." is mistaken. Try being African American and walk by someone's car and hear them click all the doors locked. Or try catching a cab late at night. Try walking into a store and have the clerks watch you because they think you are going to steal. Or meeting a white person that thinks the proper greeting is not to shake your hand but give you a fist pound.
In regards to the comment "Like I said, are you suggesting blacks are becoming civilized at a slower pace?"
I was stating at how it is harder for them to be on equal footing nowadays as a result of their past. To think that the 40 years since the civil rights movement is enough time to "catch up" Imagine you are running a race against someone where you are being held by several other people and the other person ends up way in front of you. Now lets say all those people let go and you are free to run at the same pace as the other person. Have you caught up now that the restrictions against you are gone, or are you far behind still. Are you becoming civilized slower, or are you at a disadvantage due to being held back for so long?
Then, if you agree with me, and if you also agree the vast majority of those who grow up in poverty, oppression, or injustice do not commit crimes then, you have to find some other factor -- other than their environment or situation -- to account for criminal behavior.
You're right and I've already copped to the ill-formed argument in those questions. However, I don't back down from the fact that the vast majority of these incidents are instigated by blacks.
Who's to blame for that perception?
Who was it I quoted in here the other day? Either Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson, I don't recall. But even they lamented the fact they they, themselves, sigh in relief when -- upon hearing footsteps -- they turn and find it is not a black person following them down the street.
Frankly, if you look and dress like the thugs we see on the videotapes of these riots, you can expect to be treated like one.
How many music genres routinely have murders in their studios and amongst their "artists?"
C'mon, if you look like a hood, you can expect to be treated like one. I doubt I'd lock my doors if someone dressed like Tiger Woods or Bill Cosby or Oprah Winfrey approached my vehicle and, frankly, I never notice unless they look like a fucing gangster to begin with.
There are people in Appalachia that have been poor for generations upon generations and you don't seem them rioting in the streets.
I don't understand this "catch up" theory. The playing field is level...join the game. I don't believe your "race" analogy applies. There's no one to "catch up" to...you're now free to pursue whatever American Dream you've been kept from pursuing. It's not a race.
The analogy was that yes you are free to join the race, but you are starting from way behind. To say that it is a completely level playing field is just something I do not believe in.
And the poor in Appalachia have not had the discrimination nor civil righs violations that have occurred in the African American community.
And I agree that Al and Jesse do hold up the race card, it is their livelihood to do so unfortunately.
I think the whole race analogy is bogus.
There is no start or finish line. You're free to swim in the pool with the rest of us.
You are free to hold your opinon. I disagree.
Obviously. I'd like for you to articulate why.
Why do black rappers glorify cop killing and abuse of women? And why do so many emulate these thugs and their thuggish behavior?
Why are blacks that try to achieve in education ridiculed as trying to be too white; and, sometimes the victims of black on black crime?
You want to know why blacks are stuck in the "race," it's because they won't allow some to excel. They want to wallow in their victimhood and still reap the benefits of achievement.
First the Civil Rights Act of 1964 created the equal playing field. Then Affirmative Action gave blacks preference. Tell me, in what areas of business or society are black under-represented?
, there was a black Police Chief in charge of the Austin Police Department when the Tuesday murder occurred.
The only thing keeping blacks back is their own culture. It's not the law and it's not the "man," anymore.
I don't codone the actions of black rappers. Not being one I would guess that their anger towards police stems from the long history of abuse from police. The behavior is being gloriifed on MTV and that is why you also see white youth glorifying it as well.
There are those who wallow in their victimhood just as their are whites who still profess a denail that discrimintation still exists. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 set to create an equal playing field, it doesn't mean the field was actually created then.
Do you honestly believe that since 1964, blacks and whites have been on a level playing field. You see no disadvantage that exists there? Would you say that if your father or mother went to college, that you are more likely to go as well? And if they didn't you are less likely to go?
If so imagine that on a grand scale. That is what I mean as far as being held back in the race and struggling to catch up.
Yeah, I avoid the white thugs too.
No, Blacks have been given an advantage.
Name one caused by prejudice and discrimination.
That's true of all races. But, there are countless organizations and federal programs designed to get blacks into college. Not so for any other race -- except maybe for hispanics.
Believe it or not, not that many white people went to college a few generations back.
There's no excuse for anyone now...except a cultural resistance.
One example of discrimination, all the golf courses that still held to discrimantion up into the 1990's (~ 30 years after the 1964 act) until the PGA threatend to not allow them to hold tournaments. (just refers to golf I know, but it still shows discrimination.)
As far as the colleges go, the percentage of African Americans going to college is rising in the past few generations as well, but what you are missing is that while there were many whites who did not go to college a few generations ago, the opportunity to go was there, and the white race had a head start on higher education and passing that vaule down to their children as well. As far as the scholarships go, minorities have on average a lower per capita income thatn whites. That is why they were created. And to say that no other race can say that except hispanics is false. Actually, it really is only the white race who can claim there is no specific race qualified scholarship. (except for a couple of ones created in the past few years to stir up debate link )
Free market fixed it, eh?
So, why shouldn't private individuals, companies, and clubs be allowed to discriminate?
And now the opportunity is here. You talk like all the blacks now going to school were around to be denied that opportunity two generations ago.
Try to name anything similar to the United Negro College Fund today. Scholarships and organizations aiming to increase black enrollment in college far, far outnumber any other race.
Well, that is probably because at the moment African Americans are the largest minority with the Hispanics close behind them. I would guess that the reason the other ethnicities haven't formed the large organized groups that the blacks have is due to the fact that they didn't face the same discrimination and persecution that the blacks faced for so long, (This is not to say they endured no discrimination) and did not form the groups in response to it.
I can recall that there were "White" and "Negro" seperated drinking fountains etc. Don't remember hearing about any other fountains made.
Social problems are rooted in vile human traits...
lust for power
greed
selfishness
lack of compassion
laziness
hatred
envy
addictions
All humans have these traits and are fully capable of taking them to extremes... some can control them better, others can't, and others still simply don't want to. These attributes are independent of race, culture, social class or age. If you want to play the blame game... let each take responsibility for their own actions.
"If you want to play the blame game... let each take responsibility for their own actions."
Ok, so let's own up to the actions of the past and how they put an entire race at a disadvantage.
god damn yoni, you really are a racist bas .
no seriously, you are a racist bas . Even if you want to go back 40 years, most violent mob like activity came from white southerners, the clan, etc.
To say that there is some genetic predisposition to be violent in individuals that have black skin pigmentation is inherently racist, and comes from a long line of white supremest thinking which ultimately concludes that blacks are less evolved etc. etc.
but to answer your question, no dumb ass there is no biological impulse in african americans that leads them to spontaneously errupt in violent activity, what you see is a product of poverty and oppressive social ins utions (i.e. the LA police force in response to your quip about the watts riots).
It is re ed to think that being poor doesn't make you more predispositioned towards crime. Why does crime occur?
-Rational Choice
-Impulse
The latter is most often known as a crime of passion. The first is the one that applies. Lets take an example. You have a job a money. You can easily afford food. Make a rational choice. You can steal some bread at the chance of going to jail or pay at a tiny hit to your pocketbook. You weigh the choice, and buy the bread. Now you're poor and jobless. You eat gruel every day. Weight the costs. A chance to go to jail (which is arguably better than living on the street) will net you tasty bread. The other option is keep living in misery. Of course then, more poor people than rich people will make that dive to steal the bread.
That dive is the moral barrier. This is a combonation of several things: personal faith, beliefs, guts, and rational thinking. Why do more poor people not steal than steal says Yoni? Why, because people will more often than not choose to stay moral. They will not steal because it just feels wrong. Some people don't have the guts, some still will not take the risk of jail. Some will abide by their god given laws until they die and others will rationally say that stealing the bread isn't fair to the people buying it.
So, duh, being poor lowers this moral barrier. So do instances of heroics and desperation. If I ran into Yoni's house and tied him to the wall and killed everyone he loved in front of them before defiling their corpses and then uncut him and said "you're free", I seriously doubt he would stand there and say "hmm, I have a personal choice right now about what I could do to this man". He would most likely attack me at the instant, despite everything he believes in and everything he knows is wrong.
Of course your environment shapes you, and of course we are not born knowing right from wrong. How in the heck would I know that killing is wrong if I was raised by wolves somewhere? I probably wouldn't even understand the concept of life and death -- just as a child has to be taught.
Anyways I have some actual relevant stats to back this up when I find my text book, especially with correlations between income and crime and the crime factor when you equalize income (i.e. percent of race that commits crime at below $15,000 or ablove $100,000), you get near-equal statistics, which tends to hover at 12% poor vs 3% wealthy, regardless of race. (i.e.12.2% of all poor blacks will commit a crime in their life, 12.6% of all poor whites will commit a crime in their life).
I'll find the book and stats, even though this entire thread is a joke and Yoni is a hater.
Yoinvoer iws not a racist. evrbody calls somebpdy a racist when they tell the triuth about balck peeple wich they dont want too heer.
I thought after this post you were going to think harder about this thread.
Guess you did not do it.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote